BORO Method
Encyclopedia
BORO is an approach to developing ontological or semantic models
for large complex operational applications that consists of a top ontology and a process for constructing the ontology. It was originally developed as a method for mining ontologies from multiple legacy systems – as the first stage in an architectural transformation or software modernization
. It has also been used to enable semantic interoperability
between legacy systems. It is described in detail in (Partridge 1996, 2005). It is the analysis method used in the development and maintenance of the U.S. Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) Meta Model (DM2). Using BORO, a data modeling working group of over 350 members is able to systematically resolve a very broad spectrum of knowledge representation issues.
(and hence, four-dimensional
) ontology
which provided neat criteria of identity
. Using this top ontology as a basis, a systematic process for re-engineering legacy systems was developed. From a software engineering perspective, a key feature of this process was the identification of common general patterns, under which the legacy system was subsumed. It has been substantially developed since then. Much of this has been proprietary, but some has been in the public domain, and elements of it have appeared in a number of standards. For example, the ISO standard, ISO 15926
– Industrial automation systems and integration – was heavily influenced by an early version. The IDEAS
(International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification for exchange) standard is based upon BORO, which in turn was used to develop DODAF 2.0. From 2003 to 2008, the start-up company 42 Objects, funded by private equity company 3i
worked on developing systems based upon BORO.
approach to ontology development. The advantage of BORO over other methods is that it's grounding in physical reality means that, if followed to the letter, the method will always produce the same ontology given the same inputs. This makes it particularly powerful for comparing multiple data-sources for semantic matches/mismatches and for re-engineering multiple legacy systems into a coherent whole (either as a new monolithic system, or as a method for designing federation of existing systems). Although BORO produces an ontology (information science) in the very strictest sense of the term, it does not produce the type of ontology (information science) that computer scientists would use for reasoning and inference. Instead, BORO's purpose is to improve the quality of information and information models, to integrate multiple information sources and extract hidden semantics.
The purpose of the method is to re-engineer disparate data sources into a common model. It is particularly good at semantic analysis – establishing whether two concepts are the same, if they overlap, or if they are unrelated. Traditional methods of data analysis tend to be linguistic; comparison of concepts is based on the names these concepts have. More modern methods have introduced a more semantic approach, where the analyst will tend to analyse the meaning behind a word. Although these methods tend to produce more accurate comparisons, a lot of it depends on the analyst’s domain knowledge and linguistic interpretation.
BORO is different to many other data analysis techniques in that treats the names of things of things as a secondary concern. With BORO, the analyst is forced to identify individual concepts by their extent. In the case of physical objects, this is their spatial/temporal extent. For types of things, the extent is set of things that are of that type. The BORO methodology is best summarised as a flowchart:
As an example, take “Waterloo Bridge” as a concept. The first thing we ask is “does it have spatial and temporal extent ?”. It has spatial extent; it spans the River Thames. However, when we examine the temporal extent we realise there have been two bridges at that site. The first, built in 1817 (two years after the battle of Waterloo) was demolished in 1920. The bridge that stands there now was built in 1942. This analysis has immediately highlighted a problem with a name-based approach – there are two bridges of that name, which one are we referring to ? At this point, the analyst can add one or both of the bridges to the ontology, then apply the appropriate names to each.
The process also works for types of things. Take “bridges” as a concept. It doesn’t have spatiotemporal extent, so we go to the next question “does it have members ?”. It does – the members are all the bridges in the world. We then identify some exemplar members – e.g. Waterloo Bridge. At this stage, it is advisable to identify exemplars that are “on the edge” of the set – e.g. things that may or may not be bridges – e.g. pontoons, bridging vehicles, etc. so as to accurately identify the extent of the type.
The final concept covered by the process is the tuple. A tuple is a relationship between things. If the concept under analysis is neither a type nor an individual, then it must be a tuple. We identify the things at the end of the tuple then add it to the ontology.
Semantic data model
A semantic data model in software engineering has various meanings:# It is a conceptual data model in which semantic information is included. This means that the model describes the meaning of its instances...
for large complex operational applications that consists of a top ontology and a process for constructing the ontology. It was originally developed as a method for mining ontologies from multiple legacy systems – as the first stage in an architectural transformation or software modernization
Software modernization
Legacy Modernization, or Software modernization, refers to the conversion, rewriting or porting of a legacy system to a modern computer programming language, software libraries, protocols, or hardware platform...
. It has also been used to enable semantic interoperability
Semantic interoperability
Semantic Interoperability is a term used in computer science as a synonym for "Computable Semantic Interoperability". In this sense, it is the ability of computer systems to communicate information and have that information properly interpreted by the receiving system in the same sense as intended...
between legacy systems. It is described in detail in (Partridge 1996, 2005). It is the analysis method used in the development and maintenance of the U.S. Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) Meta Model (DM2). Using BORO, a data modeling working group of over 350 members is able to systematically resolve a very broad spectrum of knowledge representation issues.
History
The method was developed in the late 80's and early 90's by a team of KPMG consultants led by Chris Partridge. The team was working on a difficult legacy re-engineering project and needed a new approach. The prime challenge of the re-engineering was to clarify the underlying ontology of the systems, and the work focussed on developing a process for mining ontologies and a top ontology that formed the foundation for the analysis. The top ontology was tailored to meet the needs of the re-engineering. Early work established that a key factor was to make a series of clear metaphysical choices to provide a solid (metaphysical) foundation. A key choice was for an extensionalExtension (metaphysics)
In metaphysics, extension is, roughly speaking, the property of "taking up space". René Descartes defines extension as the property of existing in more than one dimension. For Descartes, the primary characteristic of matter is extension, just as the primary characteristic of mind is consciousness...
(and hence, four-dimensional
Spacetime
In physics, spacetime is any mathematical model that combines space and time into a single continuum. Spacetime is usually interpreted with space as being three-dimensional and time playing the role of a fourth dimension that is of a different sort from the spatial dimensions...
) ontology
Ontology
Ontology is the philosophical study of the nature of being, existence or reality as such, as well as the basic categories of being and their relations...
which provided neat criteria of identity
Identity (philosophy)
In philosophy, identity, from , is the relation each thing bears just to itself. According to Leibniz's law two things sharing every attribute are not only similar, but are the same thing. The concept of sameness has given rise to the general concept of identity, as in personal identity and...
. Using this top ontology as a basis, a systematic process for re-engineering legacy systems was developed. From a software engineering perspective, a key feature of this process was the identification of common general patterns, under which the legacy system was subsumed. It has been substantially developed since then. Much of this has been proprietary, but some has been in the public domain, and elements of it have appeared in a number of standards. For example, the ISO standard, ISO 15926
ISO 15926
The ISO 15926 is titled: "Industrial automation systems and integration—Integration of life-cycle data for process plants including oil and gas production facilities" is a standard for data integration, sharing, exchange, and hand-over between computer systems.This title is regarded too...
– Industrial automation systems and integration – was heavily influenced by an early version. The IDEAS
IDEAS Group
The IDEAS Group is the International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification for exchange Group. The deliverable of the project is a data exchange format for military Enterprise Architectures. The scope is four nation and covers MODAF , DoDAF , and the Australian Defence Architecture...
(International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification for exchange) standard is based upon BORO, which in turn was used to develop DODAF 2.0. From 2003 to 2008, the start-up company 42 Objects, funded by private equity company 3i
3i
3i Group plc is a multinational private equity and venture capital company headquartered in London, United Kingdom. It has offices in 13 countries across Asia, Europe and the Americas and had total assets under management of £12.7 billion as at 31 March 2011...
worked on developing systems based upon BORO.
Description
The BORO method is a simple, repeatable process for developing formal ontologies. The method takes an extensionalExtensional
In philosophy of language, a context in which a sub-sentential expression e appears is called extensional if and only if e can be replaced by an expression with the same extension and necessarily preserve truth-value. The extension of a term is the set of objects that that term denotes.Take the...
approach to ontology development. The advantage of BORO over other methods is that it's grounding in physical reality means that, if followed to the letter, the method will always produce the same ontology given the same inputs. This makes it particularly powerful for comparing multiple data-sources for semantic matches/mismatches and for re-engineering multiple legacy systems into a coherent whole (either as a new monolithic system, or as a method for designing federation of existing systems). Although BORO produces an ontology (information science) in the very strictest sense of the term, it does not produce the type of ontology (information science) that computer scientists would use for reasoning and inference. Instead, BORO's purpose is to improve the quality of information and information models, to integrate multiple information sources and extract hidden semantics.
The purpose of the method is to re-engineer disparate data sources into a common model. It is particularly good at semantic analysis – establishing whether two concepts are the same, if they overlap, or if they are unrelated. Traditional methods of data analysis tend to be linguistic; comparison of concepts is based on the names these concepts have. More modern methods have introduced a more semantic approach, where the analyst will tend to analyse the meaning behind a word. Although these methods tend to produce more accurate comparisons, a lot of it depends on the analyst’s domain knowledge and linguistic interpretation.
BORO is different to many other data analysis techniques in that treats the names of things of things as a secondary concern. With BORO, the analyst is forced to identify individual concepts by their extent. In the case of physical objects, this is their spatial/temporal extent. For types of things, the extent is set of things that are of that type. The BORO methodology is best summarised as a flowchart:
As an example, take “Waterloo Bridge” as a concept. The first thing we ask is “does it have spatial and temporal extent ?”. It has spatial extent; it spans the River Thames. However, when we examine the temporal extent we realise there have been two bridges at that site. The first, built in 1817 (two years after the battle of Waterloo) was demolished in 1920. The bridge that stands there now was built in 1942. This analysis has immediately highlighted a problem with a name-based approach – there are two bridges of that name, which one are we referring to ? At this point, the analyst can add one or both of the bridges to the ontology, then apply the appropriate names to each.
The process also works for types of things. Take “bridges” as a concept. It doesn’t have spatiotemporal extent, so we go to the next question “does it have members ?”. It does – the members are all the bridges in the world. We then identify some exemplar members – e.g. Waterloo Bridge. At this stage, it is advisable to identify exemplars that are “on the edge” of the set – e.g. things that may or may not be bridges – e.g. pontoons, bridging vehicles, etc. so as to accurately identify the extent of the type.
The final concept covered by the process is the tuple. A tuple is a relationship between things. If the concept under analysis is neither a type nor an individual, then it must be a tuple. We identify the things at the end of the tuple then add it to the ontology.